youngjusticefandomcom-20200222-history
Young Justice Wiki talk:Profile image change
Why isn't this on "Site discussions" anymore? -- Anythingspossibleforapossible 00:38, April 4, 2012 (UTC) :It also doesn't appear on the list of recent changes. -- Anythingspossibleforapossible 00:44, April 4, 2012 (UTC) ::It's because I've moved it out of the forums, and into the project namespace. Since the discussion is one that will last as long as the series, but is not always being discussed, I felt it needed to be in a more permanent location. And in any case, it just formalizes the process. 00:49, April 4, 2012 (UTC) :::I wish there was still a link on the main page, saying how recently it was edited. That was useful. -- Supermorff (talk) 12:37, April 4, 2012 (UTC) ::::I don't think that possible, though it was useful... All we can do is update the Wiki Activity every time a proposal is made. ― Thailog 12:48, April 4, 2012 (UTC) :::::I stand corrected. It turns out it's possible, and simple enough. ― Thailog 12:50, April 12, 2012 (UTC) Another template Should there be a template on pages have a proposal? I can imagine some helpful soul uploading an image of Jack Haly, not knowing how things work here. Something like "A replacement for the image has been proposed; vote here"? It can also attract more votes. --'[[User:Tupka217|Tupka']] (talk|wall) 09:24, April 9, 2012 (UTC) :Sounds like a good idea. ― Thailog 10:09, April 9, 2012 (UTC) Aqualad (2016) As good and chronologically recent it may be, I do believe Aqualad's profile image was changed without consensus. -- Anythingspossibleforapossible 21:59, May 12, 2012 (UTC) :Not with PIC consensus. The updated pic is temporary, a practice carried over from "Happy New Year" (for everyone except miss Martian). Because if we don't have an image of the 2016, fifty-or-so monkeys will upload badly named images, completely butcher the page, and the page history. Once the HD is available, we'll get to do a full PIC. --'[[User:Tupka217|Tupka']][[Message wall:Tupka217|''217]] 22:12, May 12, 2012 (UTC) ::You really like to refer to less experienced users as "Monkeys", don't you? -- Anythingspossibleforapossible 22:15, May 12, 2012 (UTC) :::Only the really, really clueless ones. Where inexperience is combined with incompetence and ignorance. But there aren't by far as many of those around as there were two weeks ago, thankfully. --'[[User:Tupka217|Tupka']][[Message wall:Tupka217|217]] 22:21, May 12, 2012 (UTC) As soon as the HD is released, I'm sure PIC will be opened with Aqualad images, and there is the option to revert it to the previous image - though that would be an unsatisfactory result. 22:56, May 12, 2012 (UTC) Crop Can we add a rule that any proposal that isn't properly cropped (full screen or 4:3) is automatically rejected? --'[[User:Tupka217|Tupka']][[Message wall:Tupka217|217]] 08:46, June 10, 2012 (UTC) :Agreed. I've taken to striking non-applicable images out. 12:13, June 10, 2012 (UTC) ::Another emendation to the crop rules: 4:3 is not always useful for comics issues, because the frame edges often don't allow it. I think a nice backup ratio would be 4:6 (that's the sizes of a cover/full page, if you want to picture something). Though primarily for comics, it could also be used on some of the older episode images that are unsuitable for 4:3 (Marvin, Wendy, Rudy, etc.). Thoughts? --[[User:Tupka217|'Tupka']][[Message wall:Tupka217|''217]] 10:48, November 10, 2012 (UTC) Current proposals January 27th, 2013 Can we please close Lex Luthor and Match's sections now? We pretty much have majortity votes on both. This is taking too long. I know we still have to work on Despero's, but c'mon. Banan14kab 08:22, January 27, 2013 (UTC) ::Seriously Luthor and Despero are taking too long. We should reach a consensus already. Banan14kab 23:32, January 30, 2013 (UTC) Size matters Someone's personalised sig (I can only assume) has caused a miniscule deterioration of the text. -- Anythingspossibleforapossible (talk) 15:04, February 17, 2013 (UTC) Can someone get back to me? -- Anythingspossibleforapossible (talk) 08:57, February 19, 2013 (UTC) ::What do you mean? ― Thailog 13:52, February 19, 2013 (UTC) :::Fairly certain I've seen the problem too, the text squishes together into an incorrect stream of what appear to be this I suspected it was a non-closed sig, but all that I could see were closed. Only on IE though, and non consistant, I can upload a screenshot tomorrow if you wish.Regulus22 14:07, February 19, 2013 (UTC) ::::Yes, this would be helpful. I would like to able to just read it properly. -- Anythingspossibleforapossible (talk) 14:35, February 19, 2013 (UTC) ::::Found it and fixed it. ― Thailog 14:39, February 19, 2013 (UTC) :::::Thanks. -- Anythingspossibleforapossible (talk) 14:46, February 19, 2013 (UTC) Extra Guidelines Some of these discussions are becoming heated, and some of the proposals are becoming ridiculous. Think there should be a few more restrictions to both the proposals themselves and to the voters. *Reason for Change. Make it a distinct necessity for at least one reason for the current to be actually bad/out of date/etc. (barring placeholders of course). *Additions. When they come late, the discussion goes off the rails, renders half of them irrelevant, and means that a resolution be be significantly prolonged, which should not be the goal. Perhaps Making a new topic, or simply ommitting them until a conclusion on the current proposals are reached. Slight modifications on the current are of course to be allowed to better fit requirements. *Edit Requisite. While I'm all for everyone being treated equal, when some vote on this as pretty much their only contribution, with that vote being for a proposal that at least 2 admins consider to be against the standards wanted for a pose, there really should be something to stop some stubborn person from making 6 sokcpuppet accounts and voting for something and making a majority of one. Even simply an allocated time on how long the user has been a member. Regulus22 08:26, February 18, 2013 (UTC) :I completely agree. ― Thailog 11:08, February 18, 2013 (UTC) ::For point three, 50 edits or one month of editing. Doesn't have to be active every day, but at least 2/3rds of that. --[[User:Tupka217|'Tupka']]''217'' 17:23, February 18, 2013 (UTC) Current proposals It's been a while since anyone's voted on the current lot of proposals, and we're not likely to get a great many new votes. Most have a clear leader, if not as big a majority as we'd usually like. Any admins want to close them? ― Psypher 17:38, June 28, 2013 (UTC) :The problem is some have had images added halfway through the discussion. So I'm more comfortable with removing the discussion and allowing everyone one vote - even though al arge number of previous voters is currently not active (or even checking Recent Changes). --[[User:Tupka217|'Tupka']]''217'' 18:20, June 28, 2013 (UTC) :I agree with Psypher. Those images seem to have been just sitting there for months. --Cari1994 (talk) 22:50, June 29, 2013 (UTC)